Fallguy

I have always heard the TRA was opposed to carry in restaurants, for other reasons, but according to the report you posted their possition was Neutral. Also not sure why they would have any more or less liabitly than anyone else that posted their property against carry.

Very good point.

Welcome

Welcome

Boy...that was real helpful to the orginal question.

Statewide there is more than one department that has this policy, but I don't know each one of them. So not sure about Metro Nashville. But the state law that allows officers to carry 24/7 does not restrict them to their service weapon. So their is not state law that dictates what weapon an officer can carry. Each department has different weapon(s) they allow/want their officers to carry. I have no idea what the logic behind it is. Some of it may go back to the whole thing that started this...liabilty. The department may only want to be liable for weapon(s) they issued to the officer.

The state doesn't require it. The department does if they want to carry anything besides what is approved by their department while off duty.

Really? Even though federal law (which trumps and state law) allows it? I would just make sure I transported according to the federal regulation and maybe carried a copy of it with me. Sounds like the IL State trooper guide needs to be updated.

Plus this was in VA not TN anyway. Now there was a news agency or two in TN that posted info about HCP holders on their websites, but it was taken down VERY shortly after being put up. There was a bill introduced last session to make HCP info private, but like many others it failed. The best thing to do with this energy would be to encourage a new bill to be introduced and passed this up coming session. Not calling out of state editors.

There was a backlog earlier this year. You can read more about it in this thread.

Hmmmm...wish I had better advice to offer, but about all I can say is keep checking with them.

LOL...yep been a few cases of raising the dead lately...

Welcome

When was the last time you called and what were you told?

I just meant I think his point was that no matter if you were a Expert Marksmen in the armed forces, it wouldn't help you if you shot a bystander. If you cause damages to the bystander you will be found liable, no matter what. Not that it wouldn't help in other cases or that you shouldn't do the extra training.

From Handgunlaw.us Car/RV carry page.

True, but even in an otherwise "justifiable" shoot, you have no civil protection at all if you kill or injure an innocent party or damage their property like you do from the BG.

Or that there would be so many hands helping to stir....

Fine....I won't look up or post anything else from michie.com............ The Metro officer can tell you what he would do on a traffic stop, but that doesn't mean all officers would do it, or that what he was doing was right or even legal.

It's amazing just how close we can get to them, isn't it? Sorry for your loss. Izzy looks raring to go......

Welcome

I know this thread pretty much died, but. I was looking at DOS Handgun Safety Program Rules and rule 1340-2-3-.05(10) actually mentions qualifying with more than one handgun at the time you are taking the class. So while the state may not require it or make a big deal out of it, they do acknowledge qualifying with more than one handgun. So for $10 or whatever you school may charge, if it makes you feel better...go for it.

Oh yes, that is the distinction, but my question is why did they do it? Why not just a LEO carry 24/7 period (other than when intoxicated)? It seems the state is so afraid of people carrying handguns, that they felt the need to even limit LEOs in certain situations. Totally agree.... That is why in the coming months when new bills are introduced we need to call our legislators and tell them how we feel and point out any possible unintended consequences of a bill. I so need to get a life.....lol